Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

I suspect the IP guys are just going to explain (again) that IP is not a spiritual practice but a different/more aware/more informed way of using your physical body.

I just say, "So how does it work? What's the physics behind it?", Mary. And from my viewpoint that's what everyone should ask when they're watching or doing something that looks or feels odd. If you figure out how it works physically you can work on it and add it to the things you can do... i.e., you can "steal this technique". If you just 'believe' and 'feel the energy', I don't think you ever go very far.

I see no problem with physics-based explanations for spiritual exercises. If mind and body really are one, then the result of what some would call a spiritual or mental exercise should have at least some residual effect in the physical world that can be talked about or analyzed. Isn't that what a ki test is all about?

Interesting Mike. If that's what you must do to learn then you won't get far I'm afraid. You can use that logic for physical technical moves though.
Stealing is only copying and like all copying, it doesn't require much understanding.
Good luck on your path.G.

Interesting Mike. If that's what you must do to learn then you won't get far I'm afraid. You can use that logic for physical technical moves though.
Stealing is only copying and like all copying, it doesn't require much understanding.
Good luck on your path.G.

Of course you realize that "steal this technique" is a saying attributed to O-Sensei?

I see no problem with physics-based explanations for spiritual exercises. If mind and body really are one, then the result of what some would call a spiritual or mental exercise should have at least some residual effect in the physical world that can be talked about or analyzed. Isn't that what a ki test is all about?

Hi Eric. How about spiritual-based explanations for physical exercises?
Spirit is spirit, mind is mind, body is body. They're always connected but how often are they in harmony?
Of course you can analyze the physical effect but by limiting yourself to the physical only then you may never find the real why.
Just being aware that there is a mental aspect and a spiritual aspect means that as you train and come across realizations then you can acknowledge them for what they are and gain a deeper understanding of what you are doing no?
Regards.G.

Hi Eric. How about spiritual-based explanations for physical exercises?
Spirit is spirit, mind is mind, body is body. They're always connected but how often are they in harmony?
Of course you can analyze the physical effect but by limiting yourself to the physical only then you may never find the real why.
Just being aware that there is a mental aspect and a spiritual aspect means that as you train and come across realizations then you can acknowledge them for what they are and gain a deeper understanding of what you are doing no?
Regards.G.

Graham, the whole mind and body in harmony thing comes from the traditional observation about qi, jing, and shen (just like the Japanese "shin"... it's all borrowed from the Chinese). What they mean by "spirit" is not really at all like the "spirit" we use in "Holy Ghost" or something like that. It's more akin to "a fine, noble, spirit" in terms of alertness, focus, etc.

The pertinent saying about mind and body is basically that the desire to do something (this comes from the "heart") triggers the mind, the mind triggers the qi/ki, and the ki/qi triggers or leads the actual application of strength. This is "mind and body coordinated". It refers to a type of coordination in human movement.

O-Sensei understood this relationship because he was raised on reading the Chinese classics. The use of the mind to lead the qi to lead the strength is what he referred to in his douka as "the Divine Intent" or something like that. It appears that you are appending some different perspectives to the whole mind and body thing.

Interesting Mike. If that's what you must do to learn then you won't get far I'm afraid. You can use that logic for physical technical moves though. Stealing is only copying and like all copying, it doesn't require much understanding. Good luck on your path.G.

Hi Graham,

You can copy the words of a joke, by re-telling using the same words, what happens though if you don't get the joke because the humour is too subtle or leftfield? Stealing words - easy, stealing the humour - not so.

Personally I don't think that physics is going to explain the totallity of what is happening inside the mind/body of someone doing aikido.
Sure if you get the required funding and willing scientists to wire up the willing aikidoka, you will get readings that explain the body position and condition. Where the scientists will struggle is with the measuring/quantifying what is happening in the mind of both uke and nage. How Nage uses the mind to manipulate his/her own body and how the mind is used to create the connection to uke's mind/body.

When someone can measure that, then we might be able to have a fully objective debate. Until then it's all about more of what we have at the moment, which is a bit of a messy subjective minefield.

Graham, the whole mind and body in harmony thing comes from the traditional observation about qi, jing, and shen (just like the Japanese "shin"... it's all borrowed from the Chinese). What they mean by "spirit" is not really at all like the "spirit" we use in "Holy Ghost" or something like that. It's more akin to "a fine, noble, spirit" in terms of alertness, focus, etc.

The pertinent saying about mind and body is basically that the desire to do something (this comes from the "heart") triggers the mind, the mind triggers the qi/ki, and the ki/qi triggers or leads the actual application of strength. This is "mind and body coordinated". It refers to a type of coordination in human movement.

O-Sensei understood this relationship because he was raised on reading the Chinese classics. The use of the mind to lead the qi to lead the strength is what he referred to in his douka as "the Divine Intent" or something like that. It appears that you are appending some different perspectives to the whole mind and body thing.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

Thank you Mike. Nothing is borrowed, it is translated and understood. Spirit is indeed to do with alertness, focus etc. for they are all of the spirit obviousely. However I do append a perspective which may well be different to yours.
Simply put it's spirit leads mind and mind leads body. True
desire is of the spirit as is true purpose as is true intention.
True spirit is indeed noble, hence it is kind, compassionate, humble, loving, understanding, responsible, able, all noble qualities.
Losing these qualities you will be left with mind not in harmony with spirit and false understandings and thus motions opposed to true spirit. Thus no Aikido.
This is my view and my practice. Discipline in the practice of spirit, calming of mind, harmoniouse motion.
Regards. G.

You can copy the words of a joke, by re-telling using the same words, what happens though if you don't get the joke because the humour is too subtle or leftfield? Stealing words - easy, stealing the humour - not so.

Personally I don't think that physics is going to explain the totallity of what is happening inside the mind/body of someone doing aikido.
Sure if you get the required funding and willing scientists to wire up the willing aikidoka, you will get readings that explain the body position and condition. Where the scientists will struggle is with the measuring/quantifying what is happening in the mind of both uke and nage. How Nage uses the mind to manipulate his/her own body and how the mind is used to create the connection to uke's mind/body.

When someone can measure that, then we might be able to have a fully objective debate. Until then it's all about more of what we have at the moment, which is a bit of a messy subjective minefield.

regards,

Mark

Hi Mark. Copying a joke and yet not understanding was precisely my point was it not?
Measure? It's not subjective at all. Why worry about scientists measuring? You measure all the time don't you? You can measure how comfortable you are at a certain move or technique and thus understand where you need more practice. You can measure how much focus you are applying, you can measure how well you kept center or not, you can measure what type of intention or feeling you were expressing.
Responsibility lies not with others but with self.
Regards.G.

Hi Eric. How about spiritual-based explanations for physical exercises?
Spirit is spirit, mind is mind, body is body. They're always connected but how often are they in harmony?
Of course you can analyze the physical effect but by limiting yourself to the physical only then you may never find the real why.
Just being aware that there is a mental aspect and a spiritual aspect means that as you train and come across realizations then you can acknowledge them for what they are and gain a deeper understanding of what you are doing no?
Regards.G.

I am happy to discuss this line of thinking further, but to make sure we are talking about the same things, could you explain your position on what spirit, mind, and body are? It will become very messy if we don't have a similar vocabulary to start from.

Interesting Mike. If that's what you must do to learn then you won't get far I'm afraid. You can use that logic for physical technical moves though.
Stealing is only copying and like all copying, it doesn't require much understanding.
Good luck on your path.G.

I think I essentially disagree. If we look at stealing understanding as simply copying and then stopping, then I would agree somewhat, but I think one of the keys to this concept is the idea of actively applying what someone else already actively applies. The thing I personally like most about the idea of "stealing" the understanding is that it places the impetus of learning where I think it belongs: on the student. Having a good teacher is important and very helpful, but ultimately the responsibility of the learning is on the learner.
Rather than merely copying what the teacher says to do, it invites the student to observe and explore their own understanding through observation/feeling, which I think is invaluable.
I've taken a lot of classes on how to be a teacher and one of the things which got reinforced was the idea that a good teacher teaches a student how to learn. The passing on of content is almost always of secondary importance on the whole because it's dependant upon the quality of learning performed by the learner.

I think I essentially disagree. If we look at stealing understanding as simply copying and then stopping, then I would agree somewhat, but I think one of the keys to this concept is the idea of actively applying what someone else already actively applies. The thing I personally like most about the idea of "stealing" the understanding is that it places the impetus of learning where I think it belongs: on the student. Having a good teacher is important and very helpful, but ultimately the responsibility of the learning is on the learner.
Rather than merely copying what the teacher says to do, it invites the student to observe and explore their own understanding through observation/feeling, which I think is invaluable.
I've taken a lot of classes on how to be a teacher and one of the things which got reinforced was the idea that a good teacher teaches a student how to learn. The passing on of content is almost always of secondary importance on the whole because it's dependant upon the quality of learning performed by the learner.

Hi Mathew, I agree. When I mention stealing as copying I mean copying physically or copying data for you cannot copy understanding as that comes through the student studying, applying and learning as you say.
Regards.G.

I am happy to discuss this line of thinking further, but to make sure we are talking about the same things, could you explain your position on what spirit, mind, and body are? It will become very messy if we don't have a similar vocabulary to start from.

Hi Eric. I'll explain my position as simply as I can as of course it is a vast subject in all.
Firstly, we have a body. A body has many parts and we are all pretty much aware of this.
Then we have a mind. A mind is basically a storage depot, a database, it's where we store things including memories. We can store all manner of things in the mind including feelings, good and bad ones, etc. As with the body, many parts.
I thus differenciate between the mind and body also thusly: whereas the mind is the database, the brain is the telephone exchange.
Then we come to our true self, spirit, who is responsible for the other two as well as self. As spirit we learn about ourselves and capabilities. Spirit is pure, hence without negatives, thus we have a lot to learn.
For true self or spirit it is natural to be harmonious, to learn, to love, to act with virtue and honour etc. etc.
This is my basic position from which I learn.
Thanks for asking.
Regards.G.

Hi Mark. Copying a joke and yet not understanding was precisely my point was it not?
Measure? It's not subjective at all. Why worry about scientists measuring? You measure all the time don't you? You can measure how comfortable you are at a certain move or technique and thus understand where you need more practice. You can measure how much focus you are applying, you can measure how well you kept center or not, you can measure what type of intention or feeling you were expressing.
Responsibility lies not with others but with self.
Regards.G.

Hi Graham,

Personally I'm not worried about anyone measuring what I do, and I fully agree that responsibility lies with self. All of my own measures against what I am feeling or not feeling though, are subjective. The only objective measure, is to see the affect that I have on things or people externally. If I affect another on an immesurable level spirit/psyche/mental, then where do we go with that? We only have the others subjective report on what happened.

I say all this, because it seems many folk are asking/looking for physical explanations of states that are not only physical. They are wanting the humour to be described in the words, sometimes humour is in the timing, sometimes it is in what is not there, sometimes it is in the expectation of the opposite. The words are only the transport mechanism for the 'funny'.

I think we have some exercises that train us to feel internal structure and use that structure to create power. My weak theory is under scrutiny, but I'll stick to my guns for this point that aikido does have some internal/core structure training. I don't know if I would go as far as to say it was internal power/strength training.

To me, it seems a big difference comes is the fact that IP people have exercises for training and they know what they are doing and what is the purpose of the exercise. Aikido, on the other hand, has a collection of exercises for what purpose most cannot accurately describe. The fact that we cannot classify anything in the video as internal strength training says that the video does not teach internal strength training.

We are granted a period of time to figure out what we are doing and how to share this information with others. After that period expires we either need to be able to adequately explain what is going on, or we have not yet learned that piece of the puzzle. For me, this argument extends into the "creepy" stuff too. Now, we may be able to label that incomplete training ("spiritual - contents under scrutiny"), place it aside and keep training. For the record, this is one of those holding places for the real "you need to feel this" aikido. We need to eventually open that box and better classify that content.

In aikido, we sometimes settle for vaguery as a satisfactory answer to some of the more heady stuff. "Move your ki" only works as an answer for so long. After a while if you cannot explain to me what that phrase means, I will look for myself and find someone who can. I give exception in this comment to those issues which arrive out of cultural or language miscommunication.

In this sense, our technique has an omote and ura (in the old sense). We can copy what others do and replicate the action; but without the substance of the technique (the "why") we will never learn more that the outer shape of the technique. To really learn technique you need to also learn the ura, the "why" the technique works. Again, aikido seems to settle for simply learning the shape and not digging deeper to make the technique theirs with true understanding of what is going on and the ability to share that knowledge with others.

I think this response may be slightly tanget to the thread, but I thinks it important that we place the proper emphasis on those roles sharing information with those absorbing information.
Freakanomics is a great book that looks into the difference between coorelative and causal relationships. I think we have a lot of coorelative relationships in aikido...

looks into the difference between coorelative and causal relationships. I think we have a lot of coorelative relationships in aikido...

i need to get my vision checks. i thought i read "casual relationship" and i said to myself "awwwright! finally someone who want to discuss the spirituality of casual relationship" and i was about to reliving my college days. and couldn't understand how it would relate to aikido.

i need to get my vision checks. i thought i read "casual relationship" and i said to myself "awwwright! finally someone who want to discuss the spirituality of casual relationship" and i was about to reliving my college days. and couldn't understand how it would relate to aikido.

I think we have some exercises that train us to feel internal structure and use that structure to create power. My weak theory is under scrutiny, but I'll stick to my guns for this point that aikido does have some internal/core structure training. I don't know if I would go as far as to say it was internal power/strength training.

To me, it seems a big difference comes is the fact that IP people have exercises for training and they know what they are doing and what is the purpose of the exercise. Aikido, on the other hand, has a collection of exercises for what purpose most cannot accurately describe. The fact that we cannot classify anything in the video as internal strength training says that the video does not teach internal strength training.

We are granted a period of time to figure out what we are doing and how to share this information with others. After that period expires we either need to be able to adequately explain what is going on, or we have not yet learned that piece of the puzzle. For me, this argument extends into the "creepy" stuff too. Now, we may be able to label that incomplete training ("spiritual - contents under scrutiny"), place it aside and keep training. For the record, this is one of those holding places for the real "you need to feel this" aikido. We need to eventually open that box and better classify that content.

In aikido, we sometimes settle for vaguery as a satisfactory answer to some of the more heady stuff. "Move your ki" only works as an answer for so long. After a while if you cannot explain to me what that phrase means, I will look for myself and find someone who can. I give exception in this comment to those issues which arrive out of cultural or language miscommunication.

In this sense, our technique has an omote and ura (in the old sense). We can copy what others do and replicate the action; but without the substance of the technique (the "why") we will never learn more that the outer shape of the technique. To really learn technique you need to also learn the ura, the "why" the technique works. Again, aikido seems to settle for simply learning the shape and not digging deeper to make the technique theirs with true understanding of what is going on and the ability to share that knowledge with others.

I think this response may be slightly tanget to the thread, but I thinks it important that we place the proper emphasis on those roles sharing information with those absorbing information.
Freakanomics is a great book that looks into the difference between coorelative and causal relationships. I think we have a lot of coorelative relationships in aikido...

Hi Jon. Aikido settling for the shape and not digging deeper may be the apparency, as in most of life where most people do the same. However there are also no doubt many who can explain the why I suspect.
The real problem as I see it a lack of reality on what Aikido can be and a reverting to the 'old' ways of Aiki pre Aikido.
'Aiki' existed for centuries before O'Senseis' Aikido and thus the purpose of practice was changed even though done through the same techniques.
The ip I read about to me is not much different to the old Aiki as in aikijujutsu or indeed in all past samurai training.
Thus modern Aikido will end up no different to prior O'Sensei and may as well be called a version of Aikijutsu for the great samurai of the past, the great martial artists of the past from various martial arts be they in china or wherever all learned of these principles of internal power so it's all well and good but it's nothing new.
There were in fact many warrior monks in the history of Japan but this minor detail has been superceded by the glamorization of shaolin, which I also love by the way. These warrior monks who practiced these internal power ways were often hired by samurai 'clans' in times of war as they were often seen as superior warriors.
But all said and done unless a person understands the change O'Sensei made as to purpose then they will never learn his Aikido and therefore the practice of the exercises he gave will not be understood properly and the why will not be seen.
Your post was good I thought by the way. I just offer my view.
Regards. G.

But all said and done unless a person understands the change O'Sensei made as to purpose then they will never learn his Aikido and therefore the practice of the exercises he gave will not be understood properly and the why will not be seen.
Your post was good I thought by the way. I just offer my view.
.

Hi Graham,

I thought Jon's post was good too as it raises interesting questions that make us think about why and how we do what we do.

On learning O Sensei's Aikido, I'm not sure that will happen for any of us. For instance, both you and I use Ki development exercises to inform us of how to aproach the practice of aikido. These exercises as you know were not O Sensei's, they were developed to help aikidoka train towards what one talented student/teacher felt was the 'stuff' that O Sensei had, but wasn't teaching in an explicit way. So as much as we get from the deep study of these exercises, they are there to point us in the right direction, not to be the destination.

My guess is that by relentlessly pursuing the essence of what lies inside these exercises (and I don't know about you, but the more I delve the more I see), we will come to our own conclusion of what aikido is for us as an individual.

If we can discover where the moon actually is then and only then can we start pointing at it

Hi Mark. Well said. My Aikido is indeed mostly influenced by Ki Aikido principles and I have found by doing as you say I come across realizations as to what O'Sensei meant when he said certain things.
This has always been my experience, I relate it to the buddhist story of the lotus.
Thus I have what he said always in mind as targets of understanding. 'They come, I meet, I turn, they follow.' That for instance now makes perfect sense, so much in one sentence.
Then there are principles he mentioned which to me equal true 'power' and yet are hardly ever mentioned except as being 'out there' and yet they are very real and essential to his Aikido. For example the principle of non-resistance. This alone rules out competition for it transcends it. From this I have found non-oppositional makes sense, as does non-aggression and also leads to the principle of non-disturbance.
These can all be applied and taught and practiced especially from the viewpoint of energy and motion.
The key to me is it must be practiced from the viewpoint and purpose of harmonizing with and being with. Thus there is no against, there is only the path to true power and that power is harmony.
Regards. G.